warhammer40kfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Vforvendetta1
Welcome Hi, welcome to Warhammer 40k! Thanks for your edit to the User:Vforvendetta1 page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Montonius (Talk) 07:48, November 6, 2011 Mymeara Your pages do not meet the exacting minimum quality standards of this wiki and were not sourced and licensed properly. You must provide page numbers for all information on a page and a full level of detail about a subject which is commensurate with the other pages on this wiki. Your images must all contain the requisite legal license for use. I would suggest first reading our tutorials in the Important Links pages of the wiki's main page which explains all of this in detail and beginning work on simpler subjects than Imperial Armour 11 and then looking at our showcase pages so that you may learn our formatting standards. Try editing already existing pages for typos, grammar and factual errors and gaining experience in our exacting formatting standards before you begin such difficult projects, as without such experience they will likely be deleted. For an example of what we expect from a completed article, please see the Shadow Spectres article. However, again, practice with simpler tasks before you attempt something that complex. As for your images, they were NOT deleted, they will remain in our database until such time as they are needed once the appropriate licenses have been added. Thanks. Montonius 08:02, January 23, 2012 (UTC) That is not what I said. Those pages do not meet our quality standards. The lack of proper sourcing and licensing is just one problem. I would suggest first reading our tutorials in the Important Links pages of the wiki's main page which explains all of this in detail and beginning work on simpler subjects than Imperial Armour 11 and then looking at our showcase pages so that you may learn our formatting standards. Please try editing already existing pages for typos, grammar and factual errors and gaining experience in our exacting formatting standards before you begin such difficult projects, as without such experience they may very likely be deleted again. Montonius 21:43, January 23, 2012 (UTC) Tanks Please check your work. Your pages are loaded with spelling errors and typos that are easily fixed if you read over your work after completing it. Also, please do not create new categories without first discussing them with me. Categories need to be inclusive and simple. I have allowed the Imperial Heavy Tank category to stand but I have deleted the Super Heavy category (which was also spelled wrong). In general, one, large, inclusive category like Imperial Tanks is enough. The Imperial Heavy Tank category can remain for now, but simplicity, not complexity, is the byword on this wiki. Other than that, you have done a nice job on the tank pages. Keep it up. Montonius 22:33, January 29, 2012 (UTC) Great Work As always, welcome back, and wonderful work! Always worth waiting for! Montonius (talk) 07:50, January 25, 2013 (UTC) Whew, I'll bet you're sick of the Deimos Predator Pattern! Great job. Montonius (talk) 05:59, January 26, 2013 (UTC) Dark Angels Great Work. Thank you for fixing the name of the new Horus Heresy book, I did not realise it was a two-parter and so the title seemed to be mistaken. Boy, they are really trying to drag this out! I have placed all the Dark Angels vehicle pages into the correct format. I do not think you will have any more to add based on the information made available so far on those new models, but feel free to check. Thanks! Montonius (talk) 06:25, January 26, 2013 (UTC) Thanks Hey man, I just wanted to say I am blown away by your latest work. You weren't around for a while and I wondered whether you had left us, but now I see you were just saving up the good stuff! Your work is just freaking fantastic, I can't praise it enough. The depth of your research and your formatting is awesome, when I compare these pages to those on the Lexicanum I am just blown blown away by the quality you are putting out. I can't wait to see what you do when you get to non-Imperial stuff! Thanks so much for the hrad work, keep it up! Montonius (talk) 00:59, January 28, 2013 (UTC) Yeah, IA 2nd Edition is not available in digital format at this time. If it ever does become so, you'll be the first to know. I would check the Lexicanum's pages for some those updates though, as sometimes they get someone with the physical book to update their pages. Sometimes. LOL. Montonius (talk) 03:03, January 29, 2013 (UTC) Death Guard Red link them to Death Guard (Barbarus). Excellent catch. Montonius (talk) 04:41, January 31, 2013 (UTC) Chaos is the One Chaos needs your love. Also, as there is a lot of crossover with the Imperium, I would think it might go a bit faster. if you would like a xenos faction, the Orks have almost none of their vehicles presently on the site, and they should be next for you after Chaos or concurrently, if you wish. As always, thanks for all your help!Montonius (talk) 08:03, February 15, 2013 (UTC) Nurgle Categories Gentleman, this message is going to both of you, though its contents are more directed at Vforvendetta. This category business was a mess. Shas'o was correct on both fronts -- one in that I did not want this category created, and secondly in that it does not belong on generic pages like Daemon, greater Daemon, etc. As I may or may not have explained, wikis suffer from what I call "category creep" in that their can often be an obsessive desire to create ever smaller and more specific categories that are completely unnecessary. The Chaos category pretty much covered everything we needed. When you create new categories you must also make sure that every page on the wiki that belongs in that category is added to it AND every new page created that should be in it is also added to it. This creates a nightmare of maintenance for the Admins. I did not want separate Chaos God categories because that would require us going through dozens of pages and adding them, and sometimes there is disagreement about where they should be added to and on and on. The Chaos category is broad enough and EVERYBODY can agree, in most instances, what pages belong in it. Shas'o was also right in determining that the Iron Warriors category does not belong on a vehicle page. That page is a generic page for all Vindicators. A Traitor Legion category must only be added to pages whose topics are WHOLLY contained within that category and apply ONLY to the Iron Warriors. Now, this was not your fault, V, as we have never spoken about this topic before, as there was no need to before this. But Shas'o is the wiki's category keeper, and his decisions generally trump all others save mine or Algrim's when it comes to categories; please listen to him. But the general rule is: less categories, not more. As to the Nurgle category, it is now on so many pages that I do not have the time to go through and remove it. If one of you has the time please remove it, otherwise I will let it stand for now. Thanks for both your efforts, but one recommendation I would make in the future is that if there is uncertainty over a given action or a dispute about it, please leave a message on mine or Algrim's talk pages and get an Admin ruling before moving forward so we can prevent these kinds of disputes from happening again. In any event, I loved what you did with the Chaos pages, V, and I look forward to the new pages you will be adding within this sphere. Thanks, everybody. Montonius (talk) 05:57, February 23, 2013 (UTC) As I said, you have nothing to apologise for, you didn't know; we've never discussed category creation. No worries. And thanks again for your Chaos work. Montonius (talk) 22:23, February 24, 2013 (UTC) Aircraft You can find both on the TPB, though the newer one is only a collection of pages and not the whole book. Montonius (talk) 06:56, March 4, 2013 (UTC) Unfortunately, that's all there is. I do not expect a full copy to be made available soon, though perhaps at some point in the future. We do what we can. You can also check the Lexicanum pages, as they sometimes add the relevant information from non-digital books to their pages. Second-hand information is still fine. Montonius (talk) 07:56, March 4, 2013 (UTC) Imperial Guard (2nd Edition) Hey V, where did you get the Second Edition copy? Did you buy it? Montonius (talk) 20:58, March 16, 2013 (UTC) Thanks! A Great find! Montonius (talk) 21:29, March 16, 2013 (UTC) Codexes Hi V, I was just editing the pages you did from the Chaps Space Marine Codex and I need you to be a little more accurate in copying the information from the Codex. It's not like the IA books, Codices need to be transferred into the wiki much more one-to-one with much less paraphrasing. Please see the changes I made to the Forgefiend and Maulerfiend pages to see what I mean. Thanks, and good work. Montonius (talk) 09:23, March 17, 2013 (UTC) To be more emphatic, I don't care as much about paraphrasing in Codices, I care about accuracy of information transferred; if you follow the revisions I made to the Daemon Engine pages and go for that level of fidelity to the Codex, you'll get it right. You can also see the pages we recently did on the Necrons for another example, such as the Necron Destroyer and Destroyer Lord. Also, I believe the Maulerfiend page is complete unless it is also in another source beyond the Codex. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 04:58, March 21, 2013 (UTC) Brass Scorpion Just like to note that you're missing some info from Imperial Armour Apocalypse II. I would add it myself, but seeing as its your page I thought it best for you to integrate it in. Nice page anyway. =Shas'o'Kais= Mobility, Technology, Firepower - In the name of the Greater Good; we will triumph. (talk) 01:23, March 26, 2013 (UTC) RE: New Stuff V, Oh yeah! In fact, I was just starting to update some of this info as we speak! BTW, how excited are you for the upcoming Imperial Armour 12! I'll bet your looking forward to all the additional vehicles and wargear articles you'll be busy with for awhile! LOL! It's a never ending battle, isn't it bro? Thanks for the head's up! Algrim Whitefang (talk) 21:07, March 29, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whiteang Request Hi V, wonderful work on the Chaos vehicles. However, as the final editor of every article on the wiki, I would appreciate it if you didn't put up more than 4 or so articles at one time (may be 5 if they are short ones like the weapons), as it makes my daily editing burden far too long since I have to edit everyone else as well. I certainly don't want to slow you down, but I can't spend 3 hours editing a day and we have a lot more users adding content now than we used to. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 07:57, March 30, 2013 (UTC) No Prob No problem buddy, thanks for everything you do, its fantastic work. Yeah, I'd like to see if you could hit all the red-linked Daemon Engines on the Daemon Engine page if there is enough info. Don't worry about the red-linked weapons, you do what you can when you can. We'll get them all eventually. There's always more weapons to come in the Warhammer 40,000 universe! LOL. Thanks again. Montonius (talk) 09:06, March 31, 2013 (UTC) RE: White Dwarf Mags V, Though I found my White Dwarf 164, pertaining to Daemon Engines of Khorne, alas, I was unable to find issue 148. Don't worry, I'll keep my eyes peeled. I'll look around and see if i can find the source material on one of my old Warhammer 40K websites I used to trawl back in the day. Some of them are still around and may contain the article you are looking for. I'll keep you posted. Algrim Whitefang (talk) 03:51, April 2, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whitefang Great Job! Wow V, Great job on all of the Daemon Engines articles! Really been enjoying the retro stuff! Keep up the outstanding work! Algrim Whitefang (talk) 07:13, April 5, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whitefang I'll keep looking as well! Algrim Whitefang (talk) Yes, absolutely wonderful job on all the Chaos vehicles! Thanks for everything! Montonius (talk) 08:53, April 5, 2013 (UTC) RE: Spaceships Thanks V! I'll just stick to finishing up the ones in the Rogue Trader (RPG) sourcebooks, and leave the rest to yourself. I'll let you known if I need any help if I get stuck. Thanks man! Algrim Whitefang (talk) 22:47, April 6, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whitefang V, I'll do as many as I can stand, but man, there sure are a butt-load to write up! LOL! Algrim Whitefang (talk) 22:57, April 6, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whitefang Re: Skills No prob V! Love to help you out! BTW, the articles are looking outstanding! Always above par, per usual! Algrim Whitefang (talk) 01:28, April 10, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whitefang V, It's all good man! Nothin' like spreading the love around! *wink-wink* LOL! I'll get to it ASAP, as soon as I clean up all of these Imperial and Chaos vessels articles and add the new one, and work on the separate battlefleets...and..and.... *sigh* The Allfather's work truly is never done! Algrim Whitefang (talk) 01:59, April 10, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whitefang Congratulations Congratulations on your new job; second one in a row hope you got a pay raise! That sounds fine; I'm greatly looking forward to your Ork pages; take your time, there's no rush. Montonius (talk) 18:57, April 14, 2013 (UTC) Fury Interceptor Hey can you take a break from the Orks real quick and do a page for us on the Fury Interceptor, the primary voidfighter of the Imperium? For some reason it never got done and it's a conspicuous absence. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 20:45, April 18, 2013 (UTC) RE: Fury Interceptor He V, The Fury Interceptor should be in the following sources: *''Imperial Armour Volume One - Imperial Guard and Imperial Navy'' *''Warriors of Ultramar'' (Novel) by Graham McNeill *''Prince of Crows'' (Novella) Picture Resources - *''Rogue Trader: Battlefleet Koronus'' (RPG), pg. 10 *Image of a Fury Interceptor (found here: [http://cghub.com/images/view/77108/ Fury Interceptor]) Art is by Zachary Graves, involved with Fantasy Flight Games. Hope this helps! Algrim Whitefang (talk) 02:41, April 21, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whitefang Attack Craft Nomenclature V, Attack Craft do not receive the italicized nomenclature of capital ships, like Enterprise -class Battleship. They are only referred to y their name and it is never italicized. As such the Fury is the Fury Interceptor or just Fury, not Fury-class Interceptor, and the Shark Assault Boat is just that or the Shark, not Shark-class Assault Boat. Please make the changes wherever I have not done so. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 19:01, April 21, 2013 (UTC) RE: Picture Hey V, This from the new Neil Roberts Horus Heresy cover for the upcoming The Horus Heresy: The Imperial Truth (Short story anthology, release: May 2013) This will be from a new event-exclusive short story anthology that will make its debut at this year's Horus Heresy Weekender. Glad you dig it! Algrim Whitefang (talk) 06:23, April 30, 2013 (UTC)Algrim Whitefang Deffkopta hello mr vendetta, first off - thank you for being part of the team that's made this wiki so fantastic. i've added a page for deffcopta (i just realised that maybe i should have asked first?) it'll almost definitely need going over but i hope i've at least lessened the work, and i apologise - sincerely - if i've just caused a pain in the ass. and again, thanks for your part in making this wiki second to none. Callummacdonald79 (talk) 16:27, May 1, 2013 (UTC)callum This Deffkopta page was deleted for poor quality. However, when you are ready to do the Deffkopta page yourself, V, please ask and I will restore it so you can take a look at it if you think that is helpful, but I really need you to do it using your own standard formulation. The pictures, however, remain on the wiki for your use if you find them helpful. if this could be your next ork page, that would be cool, to, if you think that's OK. Montonius (talk) 04:50, May 2, 2013 (UTC) i was unaware that vehicle pages are first and foremost done by you, so i have apologised to montonius and now to you, for causing any extra work - my apologies. Callummacdonald79 (talk) 14:07, May 2, 2013 (UTC) Still with Us? Haven't seen you around in a while, V. Still with us? Montonius (talk) 06:01, July 1, 2013 (UTC) Missiles Oops, my bad. I got confused between the Typhoon and Cyclone (with the Typhoon being mounted on normal Land Speeders adding to my confusion). Sorry bout that. Nice page btw. Good to have you back again. =Shas'o'Kais= Mobility, Technology, Firepower - In the name of the Greater Good; we will triumph. (talk) 12:24, August 4, 2013 (UTC) Fire Raptor Weapons Hi V. Thank you for the Fire Raptor page. Can you also create the pages for its weapons, if the information has been made available yet? Thanks. Montonius (talk) 17:58, October 20, 2013 (UTC) RE: IA 2 Hey V, No problem buddy! Glad I could help. Oh, and that Contemptor pic, still working on it. I'll let you known when I get it done. Algrim Whitefang (talk), Assistant Administrator Glad to See You Back Glad to see you back V, and thank you for the new IG vehicles. However, could you please add the page numbers for the Digital Editions to the Sources section of the new pages you created? All additions must be sourced with page numbers, even when they come from the relatively less accurate Digital Edition sources where the pages will not match up with the physical hardcopies. When the hardcopies are not available we use the Digital Edition page numbers as fillers until a hardcopy can be obtained (if it ever will be). Thanks and great work! Montonius (talk) 06:10, September 18, 2014 (UTC) I have no real answer for this. We use the PDF versions generally, and then just use the page number indicated by the PDF reader (whichever one you are using). Obviously, if this is not the case for you, the page numbers are essentially useless, since they will differ from reader to reader. Try and use the PDF copies of Digital Edition stuff if possible, as that's the only standardisation we have for those products. While the Digital Editions are very nice, the page number issue has been a problem with them because of the lack of standardisation. Do your best. Montonius (talk) 07:17, September 18, 2014 (UTC) Please use them interchangeably. Montonius (talk) 07:35, September 18, 2014 (UTC) fluff material hiho, I wanted to ask if you need access to any novels, anthologies and the likes, as i have a rather big collection of them and sometimes access to other material as well.Neithan02 (talk) 21:04, September 24, 2014 (UTC) Material I am sorry, I do not have access to it but your are welcome to try bookzz. org sonner or later it will appear there I will also keep an eye open 08:33, October 2, 2014 (UTC) RE: Deredo Dreadnought Rogue Trader Material Hey V, I added the limited info on the Rogue Trader-era Deredo Pattern Dreadnought. It was kind of limited, but it was better than nothing. Hope this helps you out! Sincerely, Algrim Whitefang, Associate Administrator http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f262/SGM-Daly91/Warhammer%2040K/SWBadgesmall_zpsa703bc79.png (talk) Welcome Back! Hey V, great to see you trolling around the wiki again! Next time, don't stay away so long! If you need anything, just drop me a note! Take care bud. Ave Imperator! Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f262/SGM-Daly91/Warhammer%2040K/SWBadgesmall_zpsa703bc79.png (talk) Help Hey I made a glavies encarmine page that won't link and the picture is being a pain can you fix for me? It's on the wiki activity page, that's the easiest way to find it Alpharious Omegron (talk)AlphariousAlpharious Omegron (talk) 15:24, March 8, 2016 (UTC) RE:Novel Infoboxes Hey V, I figured it out. Just check out Praetorian of Dorn article you did for the coding. All you have to do is added the Preceded by and Followed by in the infobox, and plug the appropriate novels in. Yeah! It worked! Ave Imperator! Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 01:43, March 31, 2016 (UTC) Hey V, saw what you did on the Angels of Caliban page. Look great! Now, you can go ahead and do all of them! Have fun! Ave Imperator! Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 22:32, March 31, 2016 (UTC) RE: Novel Infobox Author Info Hey V, Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I'll look over the source code again, and see if I can fix it. I'll keep you posted when I figure it out. Humbly Yours, Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 21:19, October 10, 2016 (UTC) RE: Novel series categories I've created a pair of blank category pages for you to fill in. *Horus Heresy: The Primarchs (Novel Series) *The Beast Arises (Novel Series) -- Shas'o'Kais (talk) 02:37, October 12, 2016 (UTC) Blank category for Space Marine Battles: *Space Marine Battles (Novel Series) As for short stories and audio dramas, I can create the categories for them once we've got a decent number of pages for them. I'd just rather avoid creating the categories and then only have a small smattering of pages actually included in them. Shas'o'Kais (talk) 01:21, October 18, 2016 (UTC) RE: Word Bearers Hey V, There you go. It's unlocked now. Just let me know when you're done so I can re-lock the article. Thanks! Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 20:14, November 11, 2016 (UTC) Spelling Hi V, Good to be back. Glad to see you kept doing your fantastic job on the vehicles and books while I was away. As to your question, the spell check is working for me on those pages when I edit them, so the problem is not the pages' coding. I don't know why you're having a problem, but it might be on your end. I'll take extra care to check the spelling on them until it resolves for you. Montonius (talk) 03:53, November 12, 2016 (UTC) Infobox Audio Dramas Hey V, Made the infobox template for audio dramas. Just utilise this article as an example: Raven's Flight (Audio Drama). If you need anything else, don't hesitate to ask. Enjoy! Ave Imperator! Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 22:54, November 13, 2016 (UTC) RE: Category Problem Hey V, I figured out the issue. It had to do with some of the coding in the template. I removed it, so now you shouldn't have anymore issues with the 'Short Storys' category popping up. Just simple add the 'Short Story' category that you created. If you need anything else, just let me know. Thanks! Ave Imperator! Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 22:29, November 17, 2016 (UTC) Ask about adding a New photo on Warhammer 40k Wiki:Banning Policy Good evening, Lord Vforvendetta1. I'm Adept Tlaqh1335. I request permission to you. I have just uploaded the photo Heresyveinpopping1.png. Take a look at this: File:Heresyveinpopping1.jpg|Older jpg file File:Heresyveinpopping1.png|Newer png file As you see, my photo is much more bigger and clearer than older photo on Banning Policy page, so I suggest the replacement of the old jpg to the new png. Then all jpg files which used for warning/banning will be replaced to png. Would you agree on this? Tlaqh1335 (talk) 13:19, 10, December, 2016 (UTC) Wargear Sure, that's fine. I mean it's up to you because that's a lot of work, but if you're willing to do it, yes, it'd be great. It's always about consistency across pages. Also, if you could use this time to fill in any of the red-linked weapons found on those pages, like the Helical Targeting Array, that would be fantastic. Montonius (talk) 06:48, March 8, 2017 (UTC) Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons Hi V, I would put everything on the page that you feel is appropriate; simply label each different group of weapons and the reason there are differences between them very clearly, and make sure that the sources for everything are very accurate. I will, of course, edit it after the fact, but I trust your judgment in these matters. Additionally, I'd like to thank you for carrying out this project -- we've been needing the Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons for a very long time, and I admit to having been too lazy to do it myself! Algrim and I are very thankful for your work on this, and all the other pages you continue to do for us to such a high level of quality and accuracy. Montonius (talk) 18:49, April 4, 2017 (UTC) Dreadnought Hi V, I wouldn't rip that page apart at this point; way too much work -- for everybody. Instead, I would simply create separate pages for each pattern in addition from now on. Our pattern as a wiki is always to have one main page for a group like Attack Craft, Battleships, Plasma Weapons, etc., and then an individual page for each major individual type with its own weapon load-out, etc. The Dreadnought is one of those pages that is a legacy issue of the rapid change in the lore, so I would just evolve. Add a small description to the main Dreadnought page of any missing Dreadnought Patterns (I usually just copy out the separate article's introductory paragraph after a separate page is complete and paste it onto the main page), and then add your separate pages for each type, including Castraferrum (I'll just move the redirect to the new page). Now that is also a lot of a work, but after the incredible Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons page you did, I know you'd do a fantastic job. And when your done with Dreadnoughts, I have another project that could use your skilled weapons arms! LOL. Montonius (talk) 20:51, April 15, 2017 (UTC) New Projects Hi V! First I just wanted to thank you for all your recent contributions, great work as always Archmagos! Next, I'd like to ask you to take on two longer-term projects that you can work towards whenever you have time to make contributions. As you may have noticed I have begun a major upgrade of the wiki, much of which aesthetically is now complete, including adding the smartphone app, Twitter, new cosmetics, new mainpage, new faction colour coding, portal pages, new pages in relevant areas for Gathering Storm and 8th Edition transition, etc. As part of that continuing project, I'd like you to do for all the other Warhammer 40k books what you did for the Horus Heresy, namely adding all the novels, short stories, audiobooks and game books (Codices, etc.) to our pages. This is obviously a long-term project, but after the Horus Heresy, it'd be great if you could bring the same style to all the other books we have yet to add to our catalogue. Second, I'd ask as a personal favour if in addition to being our vehicle Magos, you could do me the favour of starting to fill in all the weapons for Imperial Knights. The Knights have become a very important part of the lore now that Titans have basically been removed from play, and we need to expand our coverage of them. If you could place an emphasis on putting the Knight weapons on the wiki as your next area of focus, I'd really appreciate it. As ever, thanks so much for your help, and you're really helping us become the best source of Warhammer 40k lore in the world! Montonius (talk) 19:47, June 13, 2017 (UTC) if I may interject: I have quite an extensive library of audio material on w40k, so if you need something specific, just let me know, i might be able to help.Neithan02 (talk) 18:24, June 14, 2017 (UTC) Welcome Back Well, welcome back, long time no see, stranger! I'm very glad to have you back, as you can that in the last 6 months we've made great headway in incorporating all the new lore of 8th Edition as well as completing the wiki aesthetic upgrades. We've also become more popular than ever, breaking our weekly viewership number records in recent months every week. We need your expertise now more than ever. "Old Earth" is open for your edit. We can talk about the vehicle loadout issue in a day or so, I need to make a decision about what is the best way to go. In general, the term "Wargear" was something that used to be restricted solely to personal weapons for characters, but that now seems to have expanded to include any weapons on any unit. So I guess I would say on our vehicle pages that still use the older "Armaments" section lets stick with that nomenclature but on any new ones you create use "Wargear." I may change that in editing if I decide it is too inconsistent, so don't hold me to it, but let's go with that for now. When doing unit compositions, never use the word "modern", that has no meaning in the fictional universe's context. Use the date as you did, i.e. "31st Millennium" or "41st Millennium", or "Horus Heresy era" and "41st Millennium." The dates are probably best and easiest to understand. Also, if you get around to doing the Knight weapons from my June request, I'd recommend using the wargear sections of the 7th Edition Knights Codex, as the new 8th Edition materials have completely dispensed with the old sections that explained the weapons' functions in lore terms. This is a real pain in the you know what and means that we have to use the older wargear sections from 7th Edition to fill in most of the weapons, both vehicular and personal, that we are still missing. Anyway, it's wonderful to have you back, and I'll let you know in a day or so how to proceed on the multi-faction loadouts. Montonius (talk) 02:20, December 7, 2017 (UTC) Multifaction Loadouts Hi V, I've reviewed your example for multifaction loadouts and I am approving it. However, let's try it live on just one page for now, allow me to edit it, and then use that as a template for going forward. As you've noticed from the edits I've done to your novel listings, you can usually tell how to adjust your formatting for future pages by just seeing what I edit on your pages, since I'm always seeking to bring consistency for the same subjects across the entire wiki. Your pages usually require far less changes than others, so its usually only grammar differentials. So get started whenever your're ready with one page, I'll edit it, and then we should be able to proceed from there with all the upgrades and new vehicles. Again, great to have you back with us! Montonius (talk) 05:23, December 9, 2017 (UTC) Extraneous Knight Weapons I can find no trace of those weapons on the Lexicanum either, so I would probably just leave them out unless you can find a listing under different names or on composite pages, but I couldn't. The Knight weapons are done, and in 2 days! Thank you! What a difference your return makes in cleaning up these holes! Montonius (talk) 02:16, December 11, 2017 (UTC) Can you also please add the pages for the Rad Cleanser and the Graviton Crusher, since both were mentioned in the Knight weapon pages? Montonius (talk) 02:21, December 11, 2017 (UTC) LOL, good point. I think it's done except for those two weapons I mentioned. If, as you're making your way around the wiki, you happen to see a redlinked weapon that might fall under your purview, Archmagos, please fuill it in if you have the necessary sources. See, even the wiki can't operate without the blessings of the Omnissiah's servants! Montonius (talk) 02:28, December 11, 2017 (UTC) Occular Augmetics One clarification. Will you be adding this or not? If not I will remove all the redlinks as it will never be added. Montonius (talk) 02:37, December 11, 2017 (UTC) Yeah, nice. Just like that. Please add it to all the pages and remove the redlinks that remain. Thanks! Montonius (talk) 20:51, December 12, 2017 (UTC) Multi-Faction Wargear OK, you need to go with the Basic Wargear, but modified as follows. First, unit compositions should all be bolded, even the stuff in parentheses. Next, the wargear division needs to be made by time, like in your detailed presentation, not by organisation as in the Basic. It is not always clear to readers that the difference between Adeptus Astartes and Legiones Astartes, for example, is one based on era. So you can say Adeptus Astartes for the 41st Millennium era, that would be fine, but the Horus Heresy era would have to be delineated by the heading "31st Millennium" or "Horus Heresy Era." I liked your long example, very nice, with the wonderful attention to detail I've come to expect from you, but it would require changing every damn wargear description on the wiki for consistency. We need to go with something closer to what already exists, and also we do need to reduce the complexity of our already over-long pages in many cases, especially now that almost 50% of our user base is on smartphones. I think it's easier to just show you the format using your own example: Basic Wargear 41st Millennium *'Quad Heavy Bolters' *'2 Space Marine crew, each equipped with Power Armour, Frag Grenades, Krak Grenades and a Bolt Pistol' Optional Wargear *'Laser Destroyer Array (As replacement for Quad Heavy Bolters)' Horus Heresy Era (or Great Crusade Era or 31st Millennium - Pick whatever works for the topic) *'Quad Heavy Bolters' *'2 Space Marine crew, each equipped with Power Armour, Frag Grenades, Krak Grenades and a Bolt Pistol' Optional Wargear *'Laser Destroyer Array (as replacement for Quad Heavy Bolters)' *'Graviton Cannon (as replacement for Quad Heavy Bolters)' *'Quad Launcher with Frag Shells, Incendiary Shells, Shatter Shells or Splinter Shells (as replacement for Quad Heavy Bolters; unit then becomes a Quad Launcher Support Battery)' *'Quad Launcher with Phosphex Canister Shot (as replacement for Quad Heavy Bolters but only if the detachment includes a Siege Breaker Consul; unit then becomes a Quad Launcher Support Battery)' This should match up with the new 8th Edition Codex wargear sections as well, which have been greatly simplified from the prior editions. It's really only the Forge World stuff which just gives endless freaking options to map out. I will edit your first use of the format which should provide a pretty good template, but the above is a good start. Also, be aware that some stuff, such as the different shell types, may also need their own pages, just like different missile types do. If you have any more questions please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks so much for taking this complicated pain in the neck project on for us, your work is always superlative! Montonius (talk) 21:00, December 13, 2017 (UTC) Synopsis yeah I can write the synopsis if you create the pages. Montonius (talk) 21:28, December 17, 2017 (UTC) Gaunt's Ghosts Series Page Hey V, Great job on adding all those novels! Very nice work. One thing though, on the Gant's Ghosts series page, books 8 and 9 and 13 and 14 have the exact same synopsis. I don't know if this was intentional on your part, or just an error? Montonius (talk) 23:54, December 28, 2017 (UTC) Anthology Hey V, Just a short not on bibliographical terminology. Collections of short stories are just called anthologies. To call them an "anthology novel" is redundant and incorrect, as they are two separate types of literary works. Thanks for keeping all those novels and books up to date! Montonius (talk) 19:44, February 3, 2018 (UTC) Neutron Laser Names Hey V, Yeah that's pretty confusing. I don't quite know what to tell you. If you can determine which names refer to the same weapon, just choose the name used by the most recent incarnation and then use it for that weapon on every vehicle that deploys it as long as you're positive they ARE the same weapon. I'm sorry that GW has become so inconsistent with its naming convetions for the same things -- something similar has happened in the 8th Edition Codexes where old weapon are getting slightly different names i the new stat blocks (and they stoppe publishing descriptions of the new weapons, which makes things even more fun). In those specific cases, I've just used the older names since they are already in use on multiple pages. Montonius (talk) 00:02, February 10, 2018 (UTC) Other Vehicles Short answer: Yes. Long answer: Little information or easy to do does not necessarily equate to unimportant information. However, I'd rather you first filled in some of the red-linked vehicle weapons, like on the Custodes vehicles Algrim just added, before doing the shorter vehicles pages, The redlinks are more important. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 02:42, February 13, 2018 (UTC) Missing Source Hey V, The Doomglaive Dreadnought is missing the Sources section. Montonius (talk) 00:09, February 14, 2018 (UTC) Hey V, When using the 7th Edition digital-only codexes, you must give the name of the page that is the source, when there is no page number. Thus the citation must read Codex Adeptus Astartes - Space Marines (7th Edition) (Digital Edition), "Rhinos" (or whatever is the section head for the page or section of the book you are using to write the article. The key is that the user should be able to exactly locate the page you used by following the section titles. This needs to be fixed on each page where you used a non-page-numbered digital source, as no source can be used without naming where within the book the information was taken from. As luckily GW has returned to the use of page numbers in 8th Edition, this only really affects 7th Edition and some late 6th Edition sources. I have fixed most of these for you on what you did yesterday (Bikes and such), so check my revisions to see exactly the format I'm referring to. Additionally, you must use the EXACT title of the source, which for the 7th and 8th Edition Codexes is now a multipart title. Especially when using 8th Edition books check the exact titles, as GW has chosen to use multipart titles now instead of the older and simper versions. Thanks.Montonius (talk) 23:06, February 17, 2018 (UTC) Sourcing Hi V, When sourcing a page, only use sources that actually describe the subject. For instance, on the Hellfire Dreadnought page, there's nothing in the pages you listed specifically about Hellfire Dreadnoughts. Therefore, those are not to be considered sources for that page. If you added any similar sources to other pages that actually don't concern that exact topic, they also need to be removed. This is because, if someone goes to that source, they will simplu be confused when tey are unable to find anything on the topic. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 20:10, February 24, 2018 (UTC) Black Library Yeah that's fine. You will need to make some accomodation, however, for Black Library titles that are not part of a series and are standalones. Montonius (talk) 03:55, March 25, 2018 (UTC)